State v. Hartley, 29817.

• Decision Date: 20 June 1946
• Docket Number: 29817.
• Citation: 170 P.2d 333,25 Wn.2d 211
• Parties: STATE v. HARTLEY.
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

170 P.2d 333

25 Wn.2d 211

STATE v. HARTLEY.

No. 29817.

Supreme Court of Washington

June 20, 1946

Department 1

Hearing Denied July 31, 1946.

Earl Victor Bruce Hartley was convicted of first-degree murder and he appeals.

Affirmed.

Appeal from Superior Court, King County; Robert M. Jones, judge.

Will Lanning and Bill Lanning, both of Seattle, for appellant.

Lloyd Shorett, J. Edmund Quigley, and Herbert H. Davis, all of Seattle, for respondent.

STEINERT Justice.

By information charging him with murder in the first degree defendant, Earl Victor Bruce Hartley, was accused of Killing his wife, Ida Hartley, in the manner set forth in the charge as follows: 'He, the said Earl Victor Bruce Hartley, in the County of King, State of Washington, on or about the 11th day of August, 1945, with premeditated design to effect the death of Ida Hartley, a human being, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously did then and there cut, slash, and wound the said Ida Hartley, with a knife then and there held by him, the said Earl Victor Bruce Hartley, thereby mortally wounding the said Ida Hartley, from which said wounds the said Ida Hartley then and there died.'

Defendant entered a plea of not guilty and a special written plea of mental irresponsibility at the time of the alleged commission of the crime charged. The jury returned a verdict of guilty and, by a special finding, recommended the death penalty. After denying a motion for arrest of judgment or for a new trial, the court entered judgment on the verdict, fixing therein the date of execution. Defendant appealed and will hereinafter be referred to as the appellant.

At the time alleged in the information appellant was approximately forty-seven years of age. According to his testimony, his past military record comprised five months of Mexican Border service during the year 1916, and seventeen months of active service as an instrument repairman in World War II. Upon his return from the African area, in November, 1943, he was temporarily hospitalized for some suggested mental trouble, but was later released and at about the same time was given an honorable discharge.

His first wife, Iona T. Hartley, whom he had married in 1928, and by whom he had two children, now fifteen and sixteen years of age respectively, separated from him in April, 1944, on account of his physical abuse of her, and, with the two children, went to Los Angeles where she later procured a divorce from him on the ground of cruelty.

In May, 1945, appellant married Ida Hartley, a woman several years his senior. She had been married four times Before , and at the time of her marriage to appellant possessed several thousands of dollars in cash, various real estate properties including a suburban home and certain business locations, and also some investments in the form of mortgage holdings.

The house which the couple occupied as a home after their marriage, and which belonged to Mrs. Hartley, is located south of the city of Seattle and is situated on the east side of a private driveway leading northwardly from 140th street, a distance of about 280 feet. The property on the opposite, or west, side of the driveway is owned by George D. McLain and Lillith McLain, his wife. The McLains' residence is about 200 feet north of 140th street. At the time involved in this action, the McLains were having constructed a new house on the west side of the driveway, about 60 feet from 140th street.

At a point just off the east side of the driveway, opposite the McLain residence and about 30 feet south of the Hartley habitation, stood a trailer which appellant's brother, William C. Hartley, and his wife, Rachel C. Hartley, had been occupying as a home since their marriage in June, 1945. The two Hartley women, sisters-in-law, had known each other for about thirty years and were good friends.

Appellant and his wife Ida owned two large knives of the bolo type. One of these knives was about twenty-four inches long, weighed approximately one pound, six ounces, and had a blade about two inches wide at its outer extremity. This knife was commonly referred to as 'her knife'. The other knife was about 21 inches long, weighed approximately two pounds, seven ounces, and had a cutlass-shaped blade nearly three inches wide and, at its back edge, a quarter of an inch thick. This knife was commonly referred to as 'his knife'. Both knives had scabbards. Appellant and his wife usually kept these knives in their bedroom, one on each side of their bed, allegedly as a means of protection against possible intruders.

All of the four Hartleys were given to drinking, the appellant and his wife being constant and heavy consumers of intoxicating liquor. The record also shows that appellant was of a very quarrelsome nature and frequently exhibited an ill humor. On one occasion, five or six weeks Before the fatal event here involved, while Mrs. Rachel Hartley was visiting Ida Hartley in the latter's home, appellant came out of the bedroom and in an angry manner threatened to cut their heads off with a 'brush hook', having reference to 'his knife'. About two weeks later, while appellant was driving his wife's car, and being then accompanied by her and Rachel Hartley, a quarrel arose between appellant and Ida Hartley. Becoming exceedingly angered, appellant, while driving at a speed of 25 or 30 miles an hour, pushed his wife from the car onto the highway, as a result of which her head was severely cut. Immediately thereafter he seized hold of Rachel Hartley with one hand and, while maintaining the same rate of speed, shoved her out of the car, as a result of which she was severely injured. Both women were taken to a hospital and there treated. An effort was made to arrest the appellant but he could not then be located.

There were frequent quarrels between appellant and his wife, usually over money matters, and when the wife refused to give him more money or was slow in advancing it, he became very angry and abusive. On one or two occasions she had him arrested because of his abuse and assaults, but when those matters came up in court for hearing she relented and allowed him to be freed without punishment.

On Friday, August 10, 1945, which was the day Before the homicide, appellant and his wife spent the afternoon in White Center doing some marketing and drinking beer in a tavern. They returned home late in the evening with a quantity of liquor and spent several hours in drinking. About 2:30 in the morning, August 11th, they went over to the trailer occupied by William C. Hartley and his wife Rachel. William Hartley was not at home at the time, but arrived shortly afterward. Rachel Hartley had already retired, but was awakened by her visitors and admitted them. The party of four spent the rest of the night, until about 8 o'clock in the morning, drinking two quarts of wine and a quari of whisky, which appellant and his wife had brought with them.

About 10 o'clock in the morning the group of four left the premises and proceeded in Ida Hartley's car toward Seattle. Their immediate object was to take Rachel Hartley to a doctor for treatment of former injuries. Appellant and Ida Hartley also had in mind visiting a number of beer taverns Before returning home. Ida Hartley had upon her person $2250 in cash.

On the way to the doctor's office, the party stopped at Riverside Tavern. The two men and Ida Hartley went into the tavern, but Rachel remained in the car and awaited their return. After about a half hour, she became annoyed at the delay and left the car, going on foot to her doctor's office. Her husband also abandoned the party shortly afterwards, and appellant and his wife proceeded onward together, visiting one beer tavern after another until about 2 p. m.

While in a tavern in the vicinity of Sunnyside, they became engaged in a quarrel with each other over money matters, and a witness overheard appellant say to his wife: 'If you don't give me the money, I'll kill you.' Mrs. Hartley thereupon took $1800 of her money and gave it to the proprietor of the tavern for safe-keeping, taking his receipt therefor. The couple then departed, and next appeared at Andy's Tavern, on the old Seattle-Tacoma highway, about two miles from their home. After having several drinks, they were refused further service. During their stay at that place, Mrs. Hartley turned over to the proprietor $400 for safe-keeping and took a receipt therefor.

At this point, appellant wanted to return home, but Mrs. Hartley was unwilling to go. After some argument, appellant parked the automobile at the rear of the tavern, handed the keys to Mrs. Hartley, and proceeded home of foot, arriving there about 5 o'clock in the afternoon.

The witness McLain, who was superintending the construction work upon his new house, saw appellant come down the driveway and enter his home. About fifteen minutes later, McLain saw Mrs. Hartley get out of her car at 140th street and walk down the driveway toward her place of residence. McLain was then standing on his property, near the driveway, about 175 feet distant from her and had a clear view of what thereafter transpired. What we are now about to relate is the substance of the testimony given by Mr. McLain, Mrs. McLain, and Jack Sutton, a thirteen year old boy, all of them being eyewitnesses.

Mrs Hartley walked down the private driveway and approached the trailer, situated opposite the McLain residence. She tried the door but, finding it locked, turned toward the driveway. At that instant, appellant, who was lying in wait among the weeds back of the trailer, arose therefrom and rapidly followed her. Overtaking her in the driveway, he struck her a blow upon the back with the smaller one of the bolo knives, termed 'her knife', and felled her to...